re: "Creeping competencies, or incompetent creeps?"

Melanie Phillips at The Spectator (UK) clearly believes this to be mere theatre.

Money quote(s):

"(T)he British government is shocked – shocked! – that the European Union’s foreign service is attempting to usurp the role and authority of British diplomats."

Not a bug. A feature.

"Foreign Secretary William Hague has ordered British ambassadors around the world to fight off what he believes are attempts by the EU foreign service to usurp their positions"

He's just now figuring this out?

I know that the British are even less likely than we Americans to put an actual professional diplomat in charge of their foreign ministry (we've done it precisely once), but one of the flaws of the Westminster parliamentary model is that it limits such appointments to elected politicians. At least in the U.S. we can cast a somewhat wider net than that for such appointments.

"What’s with the surprise all of a sudden? The thermonuclear row over the Lisbon Treaty, which enshrined the EU constitution and thus effectively created the EU Superstate of Bureaucratiya, was all about the fact that henceforth the EU would indeed speak on behalf of member states through its foreign service – indeed, that it would usurp virtually every self-governing function of Britain and other EU member states.

The whole point about the Lisbon Treaty was that it would finally destroy Britain as an independently governed country."

Not just Britain. The whole point of the "European Project" to the de-nationalization of Europe's nationalities. The aim or goal of the EU (and the "European Project" of which it is a phase) is to avoid a repeat of conflagrations and devastation brought to Europe by World Wars I & II.

As if the nationalism of, for instance, Monaco, Finland, San Marino, and Malta is as much a threat as that of Germany, Italy, and Russia was when their nationalism was harnessed to national socialism, fascism, and communism, respectively.

The logic, it fails me.

_____

Please visit Melanie Phillips at her new home.

re: "The massacre at Camp Ashraf"

Melanie Phillips at The Spectator ("don't think alike") brings disturbing word from Iraq, that you won't get from the "news" media.

Money quote(s):

"(W)e must not overlook the massacre that took place earlier this month of members of the Iranian opposition group, the People's Mojahedin Organisation of Iran (PMOI), at their base in Ashraf in Iraq.

Despite the fact that the PMOI are ‘protected persons’ under the 4th Geneva Convention, on April 8 they were the victims of an unprovoked attack which was apparently carried out on the orders of the Iraqi Prime Minister, Nuri al-Maliki. The unarmed civilian residents of Ashraf were fired at with machine-gun rounds, as a result of which 35 of them were killed and some 350 injured.

According to the National Council of Resistance of Iran, the Iraqi Army used 2,500 troops equipped with armoured vehicles to attack Ashraf in tandem with the feared al Qods force of Iran." Bold type added for emphasis. - CAA.

The PMOI (a.k.a., MEK) are the military wing of the NCRI. Or perhaps the NCRI is the political wing of the PMOI/MEK. Experts disagree.

But the bottom line is that the PMOI members interned at Camp Ashraf are protected persons, declared to be by our own military commanders in Iraq, under the Geneva Protocols.

"(T)here are strong fears that the Iraqis are preparing to inflict further violence on the residents of Ashraf -- and no less disturbing, claims that both the Iraqis and the Americans have been either actively preventing or doing nothing to provide medical aid for those injured in the attack." Embedded link added. - CAA.

&

"(T)he last thing the British and Americans want to acknowledge is that the Iraqi government of Nuri al Maliki – the country in which so much British and American blood and treasure has been so painfully spent in the cause of making it safe for the west -- has merely become (as has been suggested on this blog many times) a puppet of the Iranians, the west’s most lethal foe"

Does no one else recall the shame of Operation Keelhaul? I fear we will see even worse this time around.

re: "The World Turned Upside Down - (Book)"

Sass And Sweet ("In Search of a Better Exchange Rate... Observations about life as a Diplomat.") has discovered Melanie Phillips.

Yes, that Melanie Phillips.

Brilliant.

She says "I am finding it an interesting read - it *is* well reasoned and well thought out - and it is also very thought provoking on some of the issues the author raises.

Granted, my viewpoints are colored by my own background, education, exposure, personality and continued readings -as everyone's would be. With that in mind, I believe it's good to be mentally and "world-view" challenged from time to time."

re: "Who needs evidence when we already know the verdict?"

Melanie Phillips at The Spectator ("defending authentic liberal values against the attempt to destroy western culture from within") identified a classic "show trial" scenario.

Money quote(s):

"The people demanding this inquiry already know what its conclusion must be. It is that we were ‘taken to war on a lie’ and that the whole British involvement in Iraq has been an unmitigated disaster from start to finish: unnecessary, illegal, mendacious and catastrophic. There can be no deviation from this conclusion. A show trial is required so that the guilty man, T Blair, can be strung up along with the corrupted spooks, law officers and spin merchants who supinely did his bidding in perpetrating this monstrous crime against the people.

Personally, I do not believe the Iraq war was illegal; I do not believe it was unnecessary; I do not believe we were ’taken to war on a lie’. I do believe it was very badly handled by both America and Britain. If there is to be an inquiry, it makes no sense to hold it in secret. The point is there is no need for an inquiry. We have had several already. The only demand for this one is coming from those who are furious that all the previous ones have failed to come up with the correct conclusion and are determined to have an inquiry that does."

re: "A British military expert tells truth to prejudice"

Melanie Phillips at The Spectator (UK) ("Champagne for the brain") notes a speech of significance.

Money quote(s):

"Britain, America and Israel are up against the same type of enemy which operates under a new and very different set of rules"

re: "Where was due diligence?"

Melanie Phillips at The Spectator ("Champagne for the brain") defines the problem.

Money quote(s):

"Concern about the appointment of Chas W Freeman as chairman of the National Intelligence Council has now reached such a pitch that Congress has launched an investigation into his foreign financial links. As I reported here and here Freeman, whose designated role will give him access to and make him gate-keeper over intelligence about countries posing a threat to America such as Saudi Arabia, China and Iran, has financial ties to Saudi Arabia, China and Iran."

"Topping the list of concerns is Freeman’s position on the international advisory board of the China National Offshore Oil Corp. The Chinese government and other state-owned companies own a majority stake in CNOOC -- which has invested in Sudan and Iran. Then there is Freeman’s chairmanship of the Middle East Policy Council which is funded by the Saudis.

It is astounding that such a man is to be entrusted with the most sensitive intelligence regarding America’s security."

&

"(T)he White House is saying the Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, did not get Obama’s approval before he announced Freeman’s appointment. Is this really likely? And if it is so, then one has to wonder at Obama’s pick of Dennis Blair who can make such an appalling appointment as Chas W Freeman and without even doing due diligence on his choice."

re: "Just whose side is he on?"

Melanie Phillips at The Spectator ("Champagne for the brain") doesn't think much of this appointment.

Money quote(s):

"Chas W Freeman has now been confirmed as Obama’s pick for the chairmanship of America’s National Intelligence Council. This appointment, to a post which oversees production of America’s National Intelligence Estimates and shapes America’s understanding of the threat posed by the world’s rogue regimes and terror organisations, has caused even Obama supporters to choke into their cappuccinos."

&

"Given this man’s closeness to the enemies of America, doesn’t his appointment to the heart of American intelligence compromise the security of that intelligence – and at a time of maximum danger from the regimes with which he is involved, threaten all of us in the free world as a result?"